From general-return-3250-apmail-lucene-general-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Fri May 13 18:43:49 2011
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED99D464C
for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 18:43:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 43179 invoked by uid 500); 13 May 2011 18:43:48 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-general-archive@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 43131 invoked by uid 500); 13 May 2011 18:43:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help:
List-Unsubscribe:
List-Post:
List-Id:
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list general@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 43123 invoked by uid 99); 13 May 2011 18:43:48 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 May 2011 18:43:48 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0
tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [209.85.160.48] (HELO mail-pw0-f48.google.com) (209.85.160.48)
by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 May 2011 18:43:39 +0000
Received: by pwi16 with SMTP id 16so1884242pwi.35
for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.35.72 with SMTP id f8mr2756086pbj.83.1305312197965;
Fri, 13 May 2011 11:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bester.local ([65.78.136.75])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p1sm1516448pbi.26.2011.05.13.11.43.15
(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Fri, 13 May 2011 11:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Hostetter
To: general@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Special Board Report for May 2011
In-Reply-To: <78630746-11B7-4E18-861E-15E575F06827@apache.org>
Message-ID:
References: <567B7495-87D2-4A4E-B528-BE1B1EBA85A0@apache.org> <059CA21D-8E66-4E3B-B4C8-18B580F81EC4@apache.org>
<20110507075254.GA24376@gmail.com> <78630746-11B7-4E18-861E-15E575F06827@apache.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
: consensus, at least speak up and say so) Do you have other suggestions?
: The Board Meeting is on the 19th and this report needs to be filled at
: least 2 days prior to that. Claims of thread fatigue, I am sure, are
: not going to go over well with the Board, so I suggest all PMC Members
: (as well as others) take some time to think about how to contribute to
: this report.
I haven't commented much on this thread because I have generally agreed
with the sentements, but as far as what specificly we should say in the
report... welll ... Quite frankly, I don't feel like there is very much
the PMC *officially* can do here.
As I see it, the only concrete problem demonstrated was that two
individuals attempted to revert/veto things inappropriately, and personal
tensions escalated.
(In my opinon) there is no evidence that the PMC (as a whole) handled
things in an inappropriate manner, because a Board member stepped in an
started laying down the law before anyone (else) on the PMC really had a
chance to even attempt to mediate the situation as an individual, let
alone for the entire PMC to formally act in a collective manner (concesus
takes more then 24 hours, and that's really the time frame we're talking
about here where the shit hit the fan)
Unless we want to vote to revoke commit bits here and now based on (as far
as i can remember) only one incident from each of the two individuals of
svn/veto missuse in long histories of productive contribution, the only
actionable steps i can think of moving forward is...
: 4. Write up lessons learned by all on commit/revert and
: scratching/itches and make sure newcomers and old timers alike
: understand how it works.
...and agree that moving forward, such behavior should result in the first
PMC member who notices starting an immediate DISCUSS thread to address the
situation and propose revoking commit/pmc karma
Unofficially: I think that by far the most important thing we can leran
from this experience, and the most productive thing we can all do to help
the community stay strong, is that everyone needs to make a concious
effort to chill, the fuck, out.
(but that probably isn't appropriate for a Board Report)
: 5. I gather, via lazy consensus from the other thread, that we are in
: agreement on refactoring and we have a way forward.
I agree, but again: i don't see how that's really relevant to the Board
Report. It's a discussion we had in the aftermath of some temper
tantrums, but it doesn't change what happen, nor does it have any impact
on what/how we can/should deal with potential conflicts like this in the
future.
-Hoss